Above the Law - A Legal Tabloid - News, Gossip, and Colorful Commentary on Law Firms and the Legal Profession - Blogroll

Add RSS RSS


Featured Job Survey: Updated Leave and Flexible Schedules

calendar Above the Law blog.jpgResults are still flowing in from last week's ATL / Lateral Link survey on leave and part-time arrangements. So far, we're up to almost 700 responses, and we have received quite a few tips about maternity leave.

The running table of firms' paid maternity leave policies that we posted yesterday has now been updated to include new information on Heller Ehrman, Nixon Peabody, Kaye Scholer, Cahill Gordon, Kirkland & Ellis, Freshfields, Kramer Levin, Thelen Reid, Goodwin Procter, and to correct information on Winston & Strawn and Mayer Brown.

Today, let's talk about how associates view their firms' policies, and also explore the availability of part-time, flex-time, and other alternative work/life-styles.

Overall, it looks like firms have room to improve:

  • Roughly 30% of respondents of either gender felt that their employer's part-time and leave options were adequate, but 42% of female respondents and 28% of male respondents disagreed.

  • Fourteen percent of female respondents said that they felt uncomfortable asking for leave or part-time status, a discomfort shared by eighteen percent of male respondents.

  • Most other respondents weren't sure, but only twelve percent of male respondents and five percent of female respondents didn't care.

    • Discussion continues, after the jump.

    Fifty-four percent of female respondents said that a firm's parental leave policy was an important or very important factor in their interest in working for that firm, and about a fifth of male respondents agreed. Flexible schedules may be an even more important issue, with roughly two-thirds of female respondents and a quarter of male respondents viewing a firm's part-time or flex-time policy as an important or very important factor in their interest in working for that firm. (Roughly half of respondents reported that they would be interested in working fewer hours for reduced pay if their firms gave them a choice.)

    So how much flexibility are firms offering?

  • 59% of respondents said that their firms allow attorneys to go part-time on a case by case basis.

  • Almost 20% said that their firms have a reduced hours policy that applies to attorneys in general, while another nine percent reported that their firms have a reduced hours policy that is only applicable to childcare.

  • About 15% of respondents said that their firms offer different billable-hour tracks, with different pay scales.

  • Roughly 14% of respondents are at firms with a flex-time policy.

  • A handful of respondents are at firms that allow full-time telecommuting.

  • About nine percent of respondents said their firms had no part-time, flex-time, or telecommuting options.


    • By Justin Bernold | 02.20.08 at 04:45 PM
    • Permalink
    • E-Mail This Entry

    Posted In: Job Survey , Kids , Perks / Fringe Benefits , Pregnancy / Paternity

    TrackBack

    Use this Trackback URL for this entry:
    http://www.abovethelaw.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/14661

    Comments

    My firm allows me to come to the office for about 12 hours a day. They are super flexible regarding which 12 hours.

    Posted by: Anonymous | February 20, 2008 04:56 PM

    how about a breakdown by firm of results?

    Posted by: how about | February 20, 2008 05:00 PM

    100% of respondents enjoy the thought of taking 18 weeks off with pay.

    Posted by: wednesday | February 20, 2008 05:04 PM

    I've heard from a good source that in the past 3 weeks a number of associates (>5) have been let go of Dewey & LeBoeuf in the corporate and litigation groups. Please investigate!

    Posted by: What happens when two mid-size firms merge? | February 20, 2008 05:07 PM

    I've heard from a good source that Milbank has been firing associates left and right. This is probably a scheme to make room for the massive summer class they hired this year. Sad thing is, I bet they still no-offer 1/3 of the summer class...


    Posted by: Anonymous | February 20, 2008 05:27 PM

    How about a list of shame for firms that claim to be family or woman friendly but are not? My law school classmate worked at Paul, Hastings. They allow reduced schedules BUT prohibit reduced schedule partners AND you have to come back full time for TWO full years to even be considered. Applies even if you've put in a bunch of years full time. My law school classmate indicates this has caused a lot of top women to leave.

    Posted by: Female Litigator | February 20, 2008 06:48 PM

    That just seems like bad business. I can understand not letting associates be part-time, since we're merely billing cogs in the machine, but you should only make partner if you have a book of business, and I'm not sure why you'd want to let that book of business go. I mean, sure, make the draw lower, but i don't think it's smart to cause the ladies to take their clients elsewhere

    Posted by: anon | February 20, 2008 06:52 PM

    Your updated table doesn't seem to be so - Nixon Peabody is not on there as you indicated

    Posted by: Anonymous | February 21, 2008 08:09 AM

    orrick just sent a memo saying they are offering 18 weeks.

    Posted by: Anonymous | February 21, 2008 12:29 PM